The only situation I was worried about was if a vulture had a great marketing team and industry contacts related to the project they can create clones that can challenge the original. (Which is why I highlight marketing in 'things I'm most worried about' ) But just airdropping to existing Bitcoin holders Pfft. (I guess if it did become an issue, the developers the new community trusts, could in the beginning make some stuff closed source till adoption reaches X market size?)True. Connections plus development and maintenance never ends. If the developers of the new project are not better then it has close to now value.
It's an interesting idea, I'm actually surprised noone's already done something like this. The idea is basically to treat Bitcoin as Protoshares and then Æthereum really becomes Bitcoin 2.0 with a ready to go userbase.
I find this much more attractive than the current Ethereum distribution plan, and since they're piggy-backing on Ethereum development they won't have that much need for dev funds. The question then becomes: will Ethereum stay open source and allow their hard work to get coopted?
Also surprising to see Vitalik helping explain how to implement the wallet procedure :)
The mix you choose depends on your marketing and business plan and the demographic you wish to attract.
And, as always, having an optimized distribution strategy is only the smaller part of the problem. Having a profitable business model is what really counts. Will it be the coin that got the perfect air drop or the coin that pays interest? Aye, there's the rub!
:)
But you have to consider the whole theory. Its all about targeting your new shares to the right people. If you are trying to get attention as a mere currency, then honoring Bitcoin or some weighted average of existing coins, perhaps weighted by market cap, makes perfect sense.
It's an interesting idea, I'm actually surprised noone's already done something like this. The idea is basically to treat Bitcoin as Protoshares and then Æthereum really becomes Bitcoin 2.0 with a ready to go userbase.
I find this much more attractive than the current Ethereum distribution plan, and since they're piggy-backing on Ethereum development they won't have that much need for dev funds. The question then becomes: will Ethereum stay open source and allow their hard work to get coopted?
Also surprising to see Vitalik helping explain how to implement the wallet procedure :)
We were wondering when the proto-DAC snapshot concept was going to go mainstream. Looks like people are beginning to wake up to it.
Here's the real end game in 43 seconds, as recorded after Dan's NYC presentation:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=455106647969436&set=vb.408134445999990&type=2&theater
But you have to consider the whole theory. Its all about targeting your new shares to the right people. If you are trying to get attention as a mere currency, then honoring Bitcoin or some weighted average of existing coins, perhaps weighted by market cap, makes perfect sense.
However, if you have a more targeted audience in mind, like people who invest and hold vs. people who quickly dump anything new they get for pizza money, then you might want to choose chains to honor that accurately represent the demographic you want to attract. Maybe your chief competitors chain? Maybe the intended customers of your DAC? Maybe people you hope will invest in your DAC? Maybe people in the same affinity group (those that like cute dogs), etc.
Wouldn't you really rather attract the attention of those who have proven they are willing to freely donate to advance the industry more than those who happen to be holding BTC on any given day? Especially if you hope to raise more money from them to develop your idea?
The mix you choose depends on your marketing and business plan and the demographic you wish to attract.
And, as always, having an optimized distribution strategy is only the smaller part of the problem. Having a profitable business model is what really counts. Will it be the coin that got the perfect air drop or the coin that pays interest? Aye, there's the rub!
:)
I can honestly say that Stan's postings are what got me hooked on this forum. Full of wisdom and humor. Awesome.
I know I will hate myself for posting this but I will do it any way…
I have always known that if I concentrate really hard I will post something (almost) as wise as bytemaster… (So, will Stan)
I have always known that if I open one of Stan’s post I will read something extremely stupid/ bloated /self-righteous …
I know this is not the most outrages of his posts, but this was the straw that broke the camels back…
SO,
“Yes, Stan your brother/boss is genius, repeating/praising him without adding nothing to his thoughts is anything but annoying.”
Dan is absolutely correct here that the new “airdrop paradigm” is a game changer for the crypto community:
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=455106647969436&set=vb.408134445999990&type=2&theater
Dan: “I suspect that what can happen is that someone can take Bitcoin, and honor the shareholders, and issue a proof of stake version that removes mining from Bitcoin without starting over from scratch. Basically upgrading Bitcoin.”
Dan is correct in the assumption that whomever is the first to do this, will receive the first mover advantage in that particular area (fairly distributed proof of stake coin unlike our unfairly distributed POS Bitshares). The Bitcoin “airdrop” of a POS Bitshares clone will be the next “airdrop” idea that receives national media attention. Dan has foretold the future here. Again.
/
/
/
Again, I'll have to side with Dan here. He has seen the future, but it's up to you guys weather you want to capitalize on his vision or sit back and watch it play out with our competitors gaining the second mover "airdrop" advantage.
So far donkeypong, fuznuts, onceuponatime, and I have pledged a bounty of a few hundred PTS worth of Bitshares to “airdrop” onto Bitcoin and Dogecoin holders at a snapshot date TBD.
Can somebody who knows computers please set this up, and you can have 5% of our donations.
Anybody else who “gets what Dan is saying in the video” and wants to donate to (invest in) our “Bitshares Airdrop Marketing Campaign” fund please step forward.
Good Idea but right now we can donate only "air"...Not really. It is pretty much ready for release... they just want to extensively test it
What Memory coin did was really good. The $ amount that I received was ridiculous back then but... I learned how to claim my coins and learned more about the whole procedure. I was a completely newbie and learned how to claim my coins!!! That was amazing for me! Secondly I learned about memory coin. I read about it!!
If this marketing campaign could attract only half the bitcoin population to use bitshares I would even be willing to give up 50% or even more. Imagine how much other DAC's would make then. I can wait a few years for my millions 8)
It would be silly to give MtGox, or the CounterpartyXXXXXXX burn address, a bunch of BTS-X shares.
What Memory coin did was really good. The $ amount that I received was ridiculous back then but... I learned how to claim my coins and learned more about the whole procedure. I was a completely newbie and learned how to claim my coins!!! That was amazing for me! Secondly I learned about memory coin. I read about it!!
Yeah that was an amazing campaign! Memorycoin now has the 72nd largest market cap with a value of $140 000! They built such a big following with that technique :P
(Sorry it's not a bad point you're making, I'm feeling sarcastic today, personally I didn't claim my coins or do more than open their web page at the time, (I later bought MMC for a brief period because I learned about some of it's USP's on Bitcointalk, but had they given more than 1% yes it may have made a difference, also Bitshares X should have a decent starting market cap.)
Memorycoin did not follow the social consensus which I consider to be an inherent part of this forum and of the bitshares development. Therefore, I have made no effort at all to find out anything at all about it. THAT IS THEIR LOSS, as I am a generous supporter and investor. But I don't like getting screwed, and Memorycoin tried to screw those supporting the social consensus in full.
QuoteMemorycoin did not follow the social consensus which I consider to be an inherent part of this forum and of the bitshares development. Therefore, I have made no effort at all to find out anything at all about it. THAT IS THEIR LOSS, as I am a generous supporter and investor. But I don't like getting screwed, and Memorycoin tried to screw those supporting the social consensus in full.
To be fair, Memorycoin was released before there was AGS or a social consensus. Memorycoin did not screw anyone, they paid 1% distribution for advertising
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=563925.0
Basically the idea is to fork Ethereum and distribute it to BTC owners.
This is the same idea why I3 explain 3rd party dev should honor AGS/PTS: to maximize the user base. And if they don't want to, we fork it and do it anyway.
But BTC holders >>>> PTS/AGS holders. So basically I3 will loose that game.
Peter R's idea is genius. That will change the crypto landscape forever. Note that BTSX and any DAC that I3 will produce can be forked and be distributed to BTC holders. If I3 was right about user base = value, then that idea is a game changer for every body.
Why would it be a good idea to give Bitshares to people for nothing?
The idea I put forth at least required they mine for it. I don't see why it's suddenly cool to give Bitcoin owners something for nothing. Is it because the price went down?
Why would it be a good idea to give Bitshares to people for nothing?
The idea I put forth at least required they mine for it. I don't see why it's suddenly cool to give Bitcoin owners something for nothing. Is it because the price went down?
It isn't cool, but it brings in a LOT of interest that was not there previously.
I'd rather not dilute shares either, but I am just looking at it objectively. My judgment may have be off, but I think the sum is greater than the parts.
Ethereum has done a great job marketing. Everyone is all excited about it. That is something that has value. It is not a value I can calculate but oh boy does it exist ! The effect is huge on the longterm success of these projects.
Bringing in all the random people who have shown to have a interest in cryptocurrencies so much that they have their own wallet has a lot of benefits.
It might be a bad idea in the longterm. I just think the more people who have a stake in something, the more interest they will have in future DACs. You will have a lot more owners who will readily transition into users of the DACs. Protoshares is pretty sci-fi. The paradigm of shares vs coins is new to most. You're not going to leapfrog past current crypto users to average joes, so bring them in now. Lock in their interest.
I haven't thought about this a whole lot, and perhaps the shares would just tank on the market ... but I wanted to put my variation on the airdrop out there for possible inclusion/refinement.
What is the point? It seems almost like a tax and it makes no sense.
There is no reason to dilute the shares just because Bitcoin dilutes its shares due to Proof of Work.
There should be ways for people to earn a stake, but don't give it away for free and if you are going to give it away for free there are Proof of Stake coins which are far more decentralized.
Let's be fair though, when have shares ever been given away for free for any company? They shouldn't be, they can only be traded.
The idea I put forth at least required they mine for it.
Let's be fair though, when have shares ever been given away for free for any company? They shouldn't be, they can only be traded.
I never claimed to hate taxes or welfare.
I've noticed that most people who hate taxes/welfare etc are mostly upset that others get something free that they worked hard for.
I said we do it to increase adoption and interest in the Bitshares system as a whole. <- This is true, longterm I am not sure what to think.Increase adoption with who? I honestly think you'd increase adoption just as much by giving Bitshares as charity to churches around the world. Why give it to miners when Proof of Work isn't benefiting Bitshares? Let them mine for Bitshares to earn it.
Why would it be a good idea to give Bitshares to people for nothing?A currency and a stock are not the same. Currencies are supposed to be owned by a lot of people. Stock just has to appreciate in price over time.
Because everyone else is doing it:
http://cryptocoinfaucets.com/
But I don't see a point in paying the elite. I'd rather give money to those who have less than pay tribute. Give them to charity before giving them to Bitcoin miners who already have too much power over the network.
Increase adoption with who? I honestly think you'd increase adoption just as much by giving Bitshares as charity to churches around the world. Why give it to miners when Proof of Work isn't benefiting Bitshares? Let them mine for Bitshares to earn it.
The idea I put forth at least required they mine for it.
NO NO NO, mining is *WORSE* than doing nothing. It is harmful!
But I don't see a point in paying the elite. I'd rather give money to those who have less than pay tribute. Give them to charity before giving them to Bitcoin miners who already have too much power over the network.
Increase adoption with who? I honestly think you'd increase adoption just as much by giving Bitshares as charity to churches around the world. Why give it to miners when Proof of Work isn't benefiting Bitshares? Let them mine for Bitshares to earn it.
Bitcoin miners are not the same as bitcoin holders. People with wallets are people who have bought into the cryptocurrency ecosystem. There is no reason to think they're elite.
A logarithm to multiply account balances is like the good ol US income tax. The higher balances pay more. So the effect of the elite will be minimized, but they'll still get more in shares. Maybe just cap the share # given to each wallet. I'm not sure, but I am not for supporting the "elite". Far from it.
Earning coins by mining ? Ok so they turn around and sell the coins on the market and they're bought up by the same group of people. What good does that do?
Now giving away to every church... you might have something... but the logistics !
Let's be fair though, when have shares ever been given away for free for any company? They shouldn't be, they can only be traded.
I use to be very hard-over on this perspective, but then I remembered that the 'founders' of a company always got their shares for 'free'. Bootstrapping a decentralized company requires a large number of initial shareholders. The idea of airdropping to create a wide initial user base is a great way to form an initial partnership.
However, if you have investors fund the development of a company then of course they should receive more than the airdrop users get for free.
What will happen to the "airdropped" Bitshares onto the 1ANGELwQwWxMmbdaSWhWLqBEtPTkWb8uDc address that i3 owns? They will not get any because we will restrict our airdrop to only wallets with balances of under 10BTC. Anybody who has more that 10BTC in a single wallet will be seen as an oligarch, and no sympathy will be given to them (nor goodwill withdrawn from us) for not airdropping our new decentralized application on the wealthy 1%.
Yes, a currency and a stock are not the same.
Bitshares may be structured like a company with shares, but its "shares" are dynamic (you can either buy, hold, and forget or speculate and trade a number of crypto-equities based on the common currencies of today (dollar/gold/BTC)). Try that with shares of Herbalife. Bitshares is a dynamic application much like a currency (use it every day for trading, speculating, coin tossing, gambling etc). So Bitshares is a stock that is a proxy for currencies so that it can be traded like one. In other words, it is a stock that is designed to behave like currencies.
What does the price of Bitcoin relative to the USD have to do with anything?
What does the definition of Bitshares have to do with the fact that we want them to increase in value as much as possible?
What will happen to the "airdropped" Bitshares onto the 1ANGELwQwWxMmbdaSWhWLqBEtPTkWb8uDc address that i3 owns? They will not get any because we will restrict our airdrop to only wallets with balances of under 10BTC. Anybody who has more that 10BTC in a single wallet will be seen as an oligarch, and no sympathy will be given to them (nor goodwill withdrawn from us) for not airdropping our new decentralized application on the wealthy 1%.
Donkeypong has a great idea for a new poll
Which coin communities would you most want to share a beer with:
Peercoin?
or Beercoin?
AIRDROPPING bitshares for bitcoin holders, I might say would lessen the value. Bitshare is the future when it comes to business perspective.
It depends on which human beings you air drop to. Just giving it to Bitcoiners who probably stole their coins in a hack? That's not cool.
How many Bitcoin hacks have we heard about lately? But I do think there are some coins where it's definitely a good idea to form initial partnerships. I think some coins are better than others.
I think if you want to change things, don't dilute anyone's shares. Find a way to do it from AGS so that everyone who already has their shares are locked in and it only affects future purchasers of AGS.
The 'forgotten BTC address' objection doesn't work either. If someone doesn't claim it, then their drop expires. I say this BTC drop idea makes great sense. Low risk, high potential reward.
Bitcoin is hacked because it is a far bigger target. This idea that most bitcoin wallets are the ill gotten gains of thieves is absurd. It has nothing to do with the bitcoin community, btc is just the largest currency by far, so of course they're going to have the most hacks. Bitcoin can hardly get any positive press at this point. You blaming bitcoin for bitcoin thefts is just an example of this nonsense.
What is the potential downside to not diluting your shares 2% to airdrop them onto millions? (the answer is 100% loss because your competitor will clone your application and distribute it to our target market who will love it and buy more making everyone sell their invictus product for the clone that everyone has deemed the "industry standard")
You guys have a great product with your Bitshares, but as soon as you launch it, then it is effectively AIRDROPPED TO EVERYONE ON THE PLANET for free, weather you vote for it or against it, because that is the nature of the open source world we live in. Don't fight the airdrop guys, because if you don't do it, then your competitors will, and they will especially love
Who thinks that we should run a faucet to the Bitcoin holders? Who cares, because it will be done for free by me or someone else the day after it is launched. Because the race for maximum adoption starts at that moment. Are you ready for the race to gain maximum adoption? Or are you still voting against physics?
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=563925.0
Basically the idea is to fork Ethereum and distribute it to BTC owners.
This is the same idea why I3 explain 3rd party dev should honor AGS/PTS: to maximize the user base. And if they don't want to, we fork it and do it anyway.
But BTC holders >>>> PTS/AGS holders. So basically I3 will loose that game.
Peter R's idea is genius. That will change the crypto landscape forever. Note that BTSX and any DAC that I3 will produce can be forked and be distributed to BTC holders. If I3 was right about user base = value, then that idea is a game changer for every body.
BTC is too centralized. The only motivation and outcome of this would be greed and centralization at the cost of innovation.
I'll go on record and say BTC owners getting everything is making BTC miners the central bank of crypto.
Let's be fair though, when have shares ever been given away for free for any company? They shouldn't be, they can only be traded.
I use to be very hard-over on this perspective, but then I remembered that the 'founders' of a company always got their shares for 'free'. Bootstrapping a decentralized company requires a large number of initial shareholders. The idea of airdropping to create a wide initial user base is a great way to form an initial partnership.
However, if you have investors fund the development of a company then of course they should receive more than the airdrop users get for free.
In my opinion if there should be such an air drop it should be to churches, non profits, and people outside of the Bitcoin community so that it can grow the community.
I think the way to do it would be to set it up as a charity. Not everyone deserves free Bitshares, but if they are willing to try and help others or are associated with groups who do that then maybe a case can be made.
I think the Bitcoin miners at this time are acting very greedy to the detriment of the decentralization movement. I don't want them to be rewarded just because mining Bitcoins isn't profitable. I'm not against rewarding miners if Bitshares are pumped in the background (their cpu resources would purchase Bitshares instead of Blackcoins).
Someone mentioned Ethereum? I actually think it might be wise to collaborate with Ethereum and other Bitcoin 2.0 developers. Maybe give some free Angelshares to people who own Ether and in exchange maybe let Ethereum give some Ether to people who own Angelshares. Also there is computing for good (BOINC) which can cure diseases and reward in Bitshares.
I think giveaways are good but its important to do so carefully in order to grow your strategic alliances.
Luckybit, where we disagree is that you ignore that btc holders are very very rarely btc devs and don't necessarily have any opinion on altcoins. They are just crypto-currency enthusiasts. These are the people you want to come check out protoshares and see what their airdropped shares are about.
You are far too fixated on some imaginary conflict with all bitcoin users. It just isn't like that. They're not mostly thieves. You have painted this whole picture of bitcoin being some evil cabal. It is rubbish. It has nothing to do with any culture. It is true that the dishonest aren't going to be attracted to small cap coins as targets, but has nothing to do with the culture.
Luckybit, where we disagree is that you ignore that btc holders are very very rarely btc devs and don't necessarily have any opinion on altcoins. They are just crypto-currency enthusiasts. These are the people you want to come check out protoshares and see what their airdropped shares are about.
You are far too fixated on some imaginary conflict with all bitcoin users. It just isn't like that. They're not mostly thieves. You have painted this whole picture of bitcoin being some evil cabal. It is rubbish. It has nothing to do with any culture. It is true that the dishonest aren't going to be attracted to small cap coins as targets, but has nothing to do with the culture.
I think this may be a bit of a mischaracterization here. I think what Luckybit is saying is that Bitcoin has OBVIOUSLY been attacked by outside interests and although many of the "little guys" are a wonderful audience for our little game here, that it might not be worth it to award free bitShares to the NSA (if they, indeed, are Satoshi Nakamoto), or those who "stole" from Mt Gox...of course there are many others out there. This is a good discussion though.
I have absolutely no issues with giving a sizable portion of my holdings to a good cause, but lets make that cause count. Let us make it something that has not yet been done and let us make it solidify the brand as a way to give power back to the little people. I know it is hard to believe, but there are many people who are buying other altcoins because Bitcoin simply costs them far too much.
I mean, imagine if we gave a % of dividends for a year to the people of Cyprus, or to people who lost coins at Mt Gox? There ARE ways out there to do this, and besides, if we are giving people a reason to help us increase market volume...the shares we already hold are going to gain value VERY quickly and the dividends will matter little.
Let us continue chatting about this until we find something that everyone goes "wtf...why didn't we think of this before?" It is WORTH banging our heads against the wall to figure this out.
Luckybit, where we disagree is that you ignore that btc holders are very very rarely btc devs and don't necessarily have any opinion on altcoins. They are just crypto-currency enthusiasts. These are the people you want to come check out protoshares and see what their airdropped shares are about.
You are far too fixated on some imaginary conflict with all bitcoin users. It just isn't like that. They're not mostly thieves. You have painted this whole picture of bitcoin being some evil cabal. It is rubbish. It has nothing to do with any culture. It is true that the dishonest aren't going to be attracted to small cap coins as targets, but has nothing to do with the culture.
I think this may be a bit of a mischaracterization here. I think what Luckybit is saying is that Bitcoin has OBVIOUSLY been attacked by outside interests and although many of the "little guys" are a wonderful audience for our little game here, that it might not be worth it to award free bitShares to the NSA (if they, indeed, are Satoshi Nakamoto), or those who "stole" from Mt Gox...of course there are many others out there. This is a good discussion though.
I have absolutely no issues with giving a sizable portion of my holdings to a good cause, but lets make that cause count. Let us make it something that has not yet been done and let us make it solidify the brand as a way to give power back to the little people. I know it is hard to believe, but there are many people who are buying other altcoins because Bitcoin simply costs them far too much.
I mean, imagine if we gave a % of dividends for a year to the people of Cyprus, or to people who lost coins at Mt Gox? There ARE ways out there to do this, and besides, if we are giving people a reason to help us increase market volume...the shares we already hold are going to gain value VERY quickly and the dividends will matter little.
Let us continue chatting about this until we find something that everyone goes "wtf...why didn't we think of this before?" It is WORTH banging our heads against the wall to figure this out.
Your heart is in the right place. Sorry, but mine isn't. I think the whole point of air-dropping is to get this thing going in a hurry (a jump-start, if you will). Dumping to foundations, etc. is unlikely to have the same effect. We need people who will spend, invest more, and start using the Bitshares ecosystem. I would argue that we need to find the fastest route to making this the #1 or #2 crypto (by market cap) and that is dropping to people who are more profit-minded and knowledgeable about cryptos. In other words, the holders and users of bitcoin or alt coins. Charities are just going to sell it first chance they get, if indeed they know what to do with it. I say get rich first, then give it away to charities.
I'm all pro marketing and if I have to put in 90% of my shares to make the remaining shares 10 times better I'm all for it. Also there's a saying in my country, if you try to look to deep in the cookingpot the lid will hit you on the nose, loosely translated this means, if you try to greedily scrape out every last bit of profit you'll probably be left with nothing.
I agree with the points mentioned above and that people should remember that all our ventures fall in the all or nothing category. They either fail or they'll become huge, there is no middle ground. The only way to succeed is if people are willing to participate out of their own free will and indeed reputation is everything. But as DA eloquently pointed out this works both ways, as long as bitshares doesn't get a similar reputation as something like Ripple, any free clone will be seen as a cheap pump and dump.
Luckybit, where we disagree is that you ignore that btc holders are very very rarely btc devs and don't necessarily have any opinion on altcoins. They are just crypto-currency enthusiasts. These are the people you want to come check out protoshares and see what their airdropped shares are about.
You are far too fixated on some imaginary conflict with all bitcoin users. It just isn't like that. They're not mostly thieves. You have painted this whole picture of bitcoin being some evil cabal. It is rubbish. It has nothing to do with any culture. It is true that the dishonest aren't going to be attracted to small cap coins as targets, but has nothing to do with the culture.
Your heart is in the right place. Sorry, but mine isn't. I think the whole point of air-dropping is to get this thing going in a hurry (a jump-start, if you will). Dumping to foundations, etc. is unlikely to have the same effect. We need people who will spend, invest more, and start using the Bitshares ecosystem. I would argue that we need to find the fastest route to making this the #1 or #2 crypto (by market cap) and that is dropping to people who are more profit-minded and knowledgeable about cryptos. In other words, the holders and users of bitcoin or alt coins. Charities are just going to sell it first chance they get, if indeed they know what to do with it. I say get rich first, then give it away to charities.
@fuznuts: I agree with the pivotal role of the people and community and the need of sustaining and building that community.I don't think Bitcoin is sacred. I don't think it should be replaced by a clone or something inferior but if something superior replaces it then the masses will not mind. Yahoo and Excite were replaced by Google. Apple OS was replaced by Windows 95. Compuserve and AOL were replaced by Comcast and TimeWarner.
One of the reasons I see why everyone needs Bitcoin to remain is that it is also the defacto proof of concept and longevity for all blockchain ideas. Only a select few will be guided by technical merits, the vast majority won't give a damn about technical details they just want to know if it can be used and trusted and won't simply disappear.
Should Bitcoin be replaced by an arbitrary other version, than that will be a massive blow to the credibility of all crypto-currencies in the eyes of the general public and possibly an insurmountable one, provided there are no catastrophic failures in the legacy systems.
Your heart is in the right place. Sorry, but mine isn't. I think the whole point of air-dropping is to get this thing going in a hurry (a jump-start, if you will). Dumping to foundations, etc. is unlikely to have the same effect. We need people who will spend, invest more, and start using the Bitshares ecosystem. I would argue that we need to find the fastest route to making this the #1 or #2 crypto (by market cap) and that is dropping to people who are more profit-minded and knowledgeable about cryptos. In other words, the holders and users of bitcoin or alt coins. Charities are just going to sell it first chance they get, if indeed they know what to do with it. I say get rich first, then give it away to charities.
This depends on which sort of charity you give it to. If you give it to charities who don't understand technology then of course they'll sell it. Some charities understand technology as well as any of us and already accept Bitcoin. Find the charities which accept Bitcoin endowment and aren't immediately cashing that out, those are the charities you should target.
There are actually plenty of people doing things which involve extremely high technology but which is public funded. I also think the idea to help people who lost to MtGox is a good idea.
It's also a good idea to give to journalists who write good stories explaining DACs or Bitcoin 2.0 technology. Award people for doing good for the community even if they do good by accident or as part of their job. If they have a Bitcoin address and are a journalist who has been writing good stories about the Bitcoin 2.0 community even if they are writing about Ethereum, they still believe the same general concepts and want a better future. Support them and be random about it.
Giving to journalists, either systematically or at random, doesn't seem like a good idea at all to me. It opens the door to huge perceived conflicts of interest. Can you imagine the controversy that would ensue if people found out that bitshares "paid" journalists to write favorable stories about DACs? It would be just too easy for detractors or competitors to accuse bitshares of bribing the press.Anyone pushing the same idea, who understands the potential, should be systematically incentivized to support Bitshares as a community, social network, and technology. The easiest way to do that is to give back to journalists who contributed ideas to this space. This should include people like Adam Levine, but should go far beyond journalists in the Bitcoin community to include blog posters and individuals who write for magazines and who are associated with large offices.
With respect to giving to charities, I agree with the previous poster: get rich first, then consider donating plenty to charities later. I think Ripple tried donating to charitable causes, and this probably didn't spread adoption much (although their situation was different--they donated perhaps to offset criticisms about the 90+% "premining").I disagree. I think you should give to all the stakeholders in the beginning and form a community first. You're not going to get rich if you have no community. The network effect is basically just an artifect of community support and Bitcoin as a community is quite small compared to some of the charitable organizations.
Let's keep sight of what the main purpose of an airdrop would be: to raise awareness, build a loyal following, encourage people to try out the technology, and attract investors and developers to this nascent industry. What would be the best way of accomplishing this?An airdrop should also be used to provide incentives for people to care about the crypto-industry as a whole, to promote the concepts, to reward desirable behavior from the participants in the community.
I submit that the best way would be to target current crypto-currency holders, the vast majority of whom have not yet encountered the new breed of crypto-equities.
Luckybit,Social entrepreneurs are seeking to solve some social problem while making a profit. That is in my opinion what Bitshares is and what we are doing, we are social entrepreneurs and that is what makes us different from Wall Street 2.0.
Making decisions because you want to punish and reward certain people is not what a business is usually in business for. That is not why I support Bitshares at least.
Giving shares to people with bitcoin wallets does not centralize power of protoshares. It would be the opposite. More people having shares = less centralization.Bitcoin wallets don't represent more people. How many people own that MtGox wallet with 200,000 stolen Bitcoins? I don't want to reward that wallet.
Who decides what charities ?
You want to support people who lost to mt gox ? Those same people that supported centralization that you complain about elsewhere ? Who is going to look at these claims?If you want to support Bitcoin users and achieve a marketing win then that is a good strategic option to take. Find the victims of scams, contact them individually and offer to help them out. There are plenty of threads on Bitcointalk where you see victims of scams.
Dropping on blockchains is a reasonably fair process that removes all these 100s of human decisions that you are suggesting.I think it's unreasonable and stupid to drop on entire blockchains. I think reward the people who care the most about the community, the concepts, the long term vision, but not the people who just want a quick profit. How do you accomplish this by rewarding entire blockchains of people?
Which church? Which charitiy? Does that charity deserve it ? etc etc.. that is not the job of Bitshares and I would hate to see time wasted on that.Marketing is about finding and forming strategic alliances with other communities. The church is a large charitable community. They care about issues such as poverty and while it might seem like an off the wall idea, it's the sort of idea which could be brilliant for precisely that reason.
Since you don't know which churches, how can you know you don't like the church before the community selects one? What if that church is a church which embraces these sorts of technology? Think outside of the box here.
Personally, I don't even like churches and would want to make sure the church has a well managed charity before I'd even consider supporting a donation to a church.
I never suggested which charities so where do you get the idea of using the words traditional?
@fuznuts: I agree with the pivotal role of the people and community and the need of sustaining and building that community.I don't think Bitcoin is sacred. I don't think it should be replaced by a clone or something inferior but if something superior replaces it then the masses will not mind. Yahoo and Excite were replaced by Google. Apple OS was replaced by Windows 95. Compuserve and AOL were replaced by Comcast and TimeWarner.
One of the reasons I see why everyone needs Bitcoin to remain is that it is also the defacto proof of concept and longevity for all blockchain ideas. Only a select few will be guided by technical merits, the vast majority won't give a damn about technical details they just want to know if it can be used and trusted and won't simply disappear.
Should Bitcoin be replaced by an arbitrary other version, than that will be a massive blow to the credibility of all crypto-currencies in the eyes of the general public and possibly an insurmountable one, provided there are no catastrophic failures in the legacy systems.
Technological innovation requires that outdated technology get replaced. Brand loyalty is actually irrational and should not be encouraged if the underlying technology is inferior. Most of us have Bitcoin wallets but we know Bitshares is superior technology just by looking at the source code. It's just a matter of convincing everyone else that it's superior and then a matter of getting the right people to use it.
Strategic marketing and strategic alliances is what I want everyone to focus on. Not just randomly dropping samples to entire networks, but to actually have an incentive distribution strategy behind what you're doing.
Reward the people in the community who count. Reward the charities that count. Actively look for communities who could benefit from Bitshares and offer to give some to them. Don't just offer to give it but provide an instruction kit or secure live CD so that it's easy to set up.
But don't preach to the choir. Look to grow the size of the social network by bringing new people into crypto who don't know about Bitcoin or who know about it but who think it's too volatile to be a currency. Not everyone who doesn't believe in Bitcoin is anti crypto or anti technology, as many people have pointed out that Bitcoin is centralized, unfair, and has problems associated with it.
These are people who might appreciate the concept of decentralized autonomous charity, social entrepreneurs who don't accept Bitcoin but who might accept BitUSD if it works. These people have to be taught how to operate DACs and how to use the new technologies which come from our community.
This is going to require we approach them with live cds, blogs, magazines, along with monthly airdrops. So I support the airdrop idea but it has to be part of a much larger grassroots campaign, strategically planned, and with a focus on helping charities benefit from this new decentralization technology as well as helping social entrepreneurs.
You'll get Wall Street once you have a community of passionate people. Get the common man/woman first. Who are some of the best men/women who could benefit the most? Which ones have done something to help push these concepts even without knowing about Bitshares? Look up some book authors and send some of them an airdrop. A lot of authors have been writing books which inspire us and they have many readers.
QuoteI never suggested which charities so where do you get the idea of using the words traditional?
You suggested churches numerous times. Typical churches are the definition of traditional.
The "airdrops" that you are now suggesting require spending fiat and are basically just a standard marketing approach. You suggest buying brochures/cds and send them out and hope for customers. That doesn't really fit with this model.
Bitshares needs mindshare because there is a competitor that is doing a great job at snatching it up. Thats what airdrops do. Typical marketing campaigns are expensive and probably not near as effective.
It appears that the majority here are finally in favor of Bitshares having a “faucet” just like every other crypto in history. How long did that take? (and you guys wonder why it is taking Dan so long to construct his “consensus machine” when you can barely reach consensus on one of the basic laws of crypto).
Next order of business:
DECIDE ON A BUDGET (this should be the easy part). Don’t spend 2 weeks arguing about how much money we should spend, then spend 5 minutes deciding who to drop the Bitshares on. No, spend 5 minutes agreeing on a fair amount of money to spend on our faucet, so we can spend the rest of the time planning the most effective way to spend this budget. If we can't come to a consensus and have to resort to donations then so be it. Please just decide who gets what and how much, then you can discuss the "how to distribute" (the fun part).
Luckybit has seized the sword from the stone and is the new champion of this thread. I encourage everyone to follow his lead here because his ideas are tactical and well thought out (think contingency planning, you are setting rules for a game). I’m going back to fighting dragons for a while. I’ll leave you with this:
The more attention to detail that you put into the target parameters for your airdrop, the more positive media attention you will receive. This is because you will be able to claim first mover advantage on any new air-dropping ideas that involve the inclusion/exclusion of certain groups based on:
WHAT BITSHARES CAN DO FOR THEM/or why we don’t think that they are a part of our target audience
This is important:
You will be determining how much or how little media attention you will receive. If you create a complex set of rules for the drop, then your media attention will be greater (because people will want to understand the fine print to see if or how they can qualify). But remember that the labor on the developers who will be distributing the coins will be greater the more complicated the rule set is.
gamey has brought up a good point as to the conflict of interest stories that can arise if we pick and choose charities.
You will be determining how much or how little media attention you will receive. If you create a complex set of rules for the drop, then your media attention will be greater (because people will want to understand the fine print to see if or how they can qualify). But remember that the labor on the developers who will be distributing the coins will be greater the more complicated the rule set is.
Key test:What will a suggested target group need to do to benefit from an air drop?If the answer is, "Sell them to raise money for their Good Cause"
then you can pretty well see that giving to them is counter-productive.
If the answer is, "Use the shares to try out the DAC's services"
or "save the shares and become interested in growing their value"
then you are onto something!
Why not airdrop a little BitShare for every keyhotee downloaded and ID registered. Have it in their wallet as soon as they get started. This would get new, non crypto people involved.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Why not airdrop a little BitShare for every keyhotee downloaded and ID registered. Have it in their wallet as soon as they get started. This would get new, non crypto people involved.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Key test:What will a suggested target group need to do to benefit from an air drop?If the answer is, "Sell them to raise money for their Good Cause"
then you can pretty well see that giving to them is counter-productive.
If the answer is, "Use the shares to try out the DAC's services"
or "save the shares and become interested in growing their value"
then you are onto something!
Why not airdrop a little BitShare for every keyhotee downloaded and ID registered. Have it in their wallet as soon as they get started. This would get new, non crypto people involved.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
THAT is freaking brilliant!
Maybe bytemaster can elaborate on the marketing strategy for keyhotee. There should be a lot of space for coupling BitShares and keyhotee marketing.
In an attempt to make a profound statement, keyhotee is more important than BitShares until BitShares is more important than keyhotee. When the latter becomes the former, we'll be rich.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
When Keyhotee becomes more important than BitShares:
That will be the time when the only person that could possibly become reach by all of this is bytemaster.
I will go a step further and say that the only DAC that will make all of us rich (and Dan somebody who everybody will recognize by name in 10 or 15 years) is BTS X. The outcome (success) of the rest of them (DACs) will be a ‘meager’ difference between him becoming rich and famous!!!
Maybe bytemaster can elaborate on the marketing strategy for keyhotee. There should be a lot of space for coupling BitShares and keyhotee marketing.
In an attempt to make a profound statement, keyhotee is more important than BitShares until BitShares is more important than keyhotee. When the latter becomes the former, we'll be rich.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That is a profound statement! :)
Keyhotee was conceived as:
1. A line of defense in the War on Privacy.
2. An on-ramp to Free Space and the DAC ecosystem.
The mega-trend of concerns about invasion of privacy and corruption of manned organizations that are Too Big to Quit (TBTQ) when coerced, is expected to bring a lot of crypto-newbies to Keyhotee where they will find secure interfaces to all BitShares DACs at their fingertips.
This is where the newly-awakened will learn the value of incorruptible unmanned companies.
Having some sample shares waiting there for them to try out those DACs makes incredibly good sense.
There is up to 1 idea that matters!
With 3 geniuses in Google, and later with 50,000 PhDs it was the same –‘search’
I am more than happy for Stan that he thinks his (son’s) company will produce many great ideas… but the sad think is: of all those 1000 projects, there is one that will make the difference and it will be:
BTS X.
Why not airdrop a little BitShare for every keyhotee downloaded and ID registered. Have it in their wallet as soon as they get started. This would get new, non crypto people involved.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's the best idea so far!!! (in my humble opinion)
Maybe bytemaster can elaborate on the marketing strategy for keyhotee. There should be a lot of space for coupling BitShares and keyhotee marketing.
In an attempt to make a profound statement, keyhotee is more important than BitShares until BitShares is more important than keyhotee. When the latter becomes the former, we'll be rich.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That is a profound statement! :)
Keyhotee was conceived as:
1. A line of defense in the War on Privacy.
2. An on-ramp to Free Space and the DAC ecosystem.
The mega-trend of concerns about invasion of privacy and corruption of manned organizations that are Too Big to Quit (TBTQ) when coerced, is expected to bring a lot of crypto-newbies to Keyhotee where they will find secure interfaces to all BitShares DACs at their fingertips.
This is where the newly-awakened will learn the value of incorruptible unmanned companies.
Having some sample shares waiting there for them to try out those DACs makes incredibly good sense.
Not so sure I agree with you...it only feels that way right now because all the other DACs have not yet had time to build up, mature and gain a foothold. I mean imagine what happens when techies realize that ObamaCare no longer has to be a death sentence (like it was meant to be), because a portion of the entire ecosystem was developed to give a % of their dividends to the Mutual Aid DAC...This is what I mean. Social entrepreneurs are trying to use technology right now to improve healthcare. Rather than offer an alternative to Obamacare in specific, you should instead show social entrepreneurs that they can use the technology as a tool to make the healthcare industry better.
Why not airdrop a little BitShare for every keyhotee downloaded and ID registered. Have it in their wallet as soon as they get started. This would get new, non crypto people involved.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's the best idea so far!!! (in my humble opinion)
Why would a social entrepreneur think to download Keyhotee?
You're assuming all social entrepreneurs on the earth are aware of the Bitcoin community but they aren't.
Not so sure I agree with you...it only feels that way right now because all the other DACs have not yet had time to build up, mature and gain a foothold. I mean imagine what happens when techies realize that ObamaCare no longer has to be a death sentence (like it was meant to be), because a portion of the entire ecosystem was developed to give a % of their dividends to the Mutual Aid DAC...This is what I mean. Social entrepreneurs are trying to use technology right now to improve healthcare. Rather than offer an alternative to Obamacare in specific, you should instead show social entrepreneurs that they can use the technology as a tool to make the healthcare industry better.
Let them figure out how, let them deal with the politics. Just focus on the technology and what it can do. Just as if you're showing someone the Internet or a personal computer for the first time ever. They don't want for us to tell them how we think it should be used or give out views on Obamacare. What they want is to use these valuable tools in a way which can improve their lives and if these tools can make healthcare better and cheaper then you'll have lots of organizations want the tools.
I'm not sure you're appreciating the proposition value of keyhotee - it can have nothing to do with BitShares or everything to do with BitShares. In the beginning it won't matter, because if everyone doesn't care about BitShares they'll still care about keyhotee
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk